Scenario
1. Seller lists item for sale on website
2. Buyer sends money via direct deposit
3. Seller never sends item, creates new alias and re-lists item on website
4. Buyer goes to Police station provides evidence and limited information on seller (full name, mobile number, bank account details); Police advise no crime committed and Buyer must seek civil action in small claims court (sue to retrieve money), but due to privacy laws Police unable to provide Buyer with Seller's address and/or DOB which is needed to properly identify Seller in order to serve notice to appear/complete small claims form etc.
What am I missing here? Is this a recipe to rip people off and get away with it? The above scenario happened to me in 2008 and my brain is still doing a Jackie Chan. /vent

He used to work at Zurich, I actually called their switchboard number and asked to be put through to him and low and behold it was him, so that was confirmed. I also contacted their IT department requesting infromation and informing them that he had been carrying out fraud from their network, they informed me that he had left the company already. And I supect that kylie person is related to him or was in a relationship with him at some stage/still is because I sent her a PM on SAU and she denied all knowledge of anything and denied he worked at Zurich which is BS because I had already confirmed it.

More people need to buy solar, like on a massive scale, so solar becomes so cheap due to high volume and high competition, take it a step further, solar companies need to offer off the grid battery packs so for the most part, people don't need to rely on the grid, this will inturn real in the electricity prices, hopefully. On a side note, I still can't believe in this day and age that every single surface area of roof and skyscraper wall is not covered in solar panels....